In fact, barring a successful appeal by the state, there is reason to hope now that the tide that has been running against non-residents will be reversed. The arguments in the recent case are technical in nature and turn upon interpretations of Constitutional clauses. Jackson's major contribution was to shift the court's focus from what is called the Privileges and Immunities Clause of the Constitution to the Equal Protection Clause. Attorneys and others versed in the law may want to read the court's two-page Memorandum denying New Mexico's motion for relief. We'll send a copy free to paid subscribers. A stamped self-addressed envelope would be appreciated. Suffice it to say, the recent decision makes it clear that New Mexico (and other states, too) can't discriminate against non-residents just because they want to horde the resource for residents. Moreover - and this is what is new - they now have to prove that the discrimination is "rationally related to a legitimate state object."
Assuredly, Jackson's victory is being discussed widely in Fish and Game Departments across the nation, where ever more repressive moves against non-residents are being contemplated. At press time, Jackson cautioned beleaguered hunters not to look for immediate relief in any state, however. Such relief will almost certainly require additional litigation. Also, the........(continued)
